The following post is from Popy Begum in OXFORD! Write back -- and feel free to ask questions about her experience and your internships.
Hello Verons!
It feels great to visit the blog and read through some of
your really insightful posts. I loved reading how the seminars and internships
are shaping your ideas and thoughts on social justice... It made me realize how
much my views have changed as well (I mean you’re more or less aware of this as
the Fellowship flows, but to be able to sit down and reflect how your views
have been shaped and changed is really refreshing). So, thank you for that!
While I was a Fellow, the blog wasn’t my favorite thing in the world, but I can
admit now that I actually miss it. Who would have ever thought?!
I recently went to a conference organized by The Howard
League for Penal Reform, the oldest penal reform charity in the world and
campaigns for less crime, safer communities and fewer people in prison. Of
course, I wanted to attend the talks involving juvenile justice reform in the
UK, since I’ve done quite a lot of research on the US’ juvenile justice system.
I was very eager to see how they differed because I had already decided they
weren’t similar. I mean we’re constantly told the US’ is harsh on crime, it
incarcerates more than any other country in the world, and so it's quite
natural to think other countries are deterring crime in a less punitive fashion.
I can honestly say I was horrified at the end of the conference. I cringed when
I learned that 7,618 children and young people are currently serving prison
sentences; recidivism is quite high—73 percent are reconvicted after a year of
being released; AND very little attention is given to the idea that young
people are most likely to outgrow crime with the right intervention and
support.
I used to assume this was happening in the US, but sadly
it’s happening in the UK, too. I guess the most thought-provoking part of the
conference for me was when the chair of the panel asked us (the audience) what
would we do if we were given 100,000 quid (pounds) to change the system. Where
would we start—the educational system, intervention charities (non-profits),
therapy… Surprisingly, the room couldn’t come to an agreement. So, I am
extending that question to you. What would you do?
20 comments:
Hi Popy! What a great post--so beautifully written, clear, and ends with a thought-provoking question. I can't wait to hear what the Verons will say!!
Thank you for the wonderful post Popy. This topic is alarming and a serious debate.
With such financial constraints in Europe and the United States, it is quite obvious that locking people up simply cannot go on. The increasing prison population together with high re-offending rates means that something has to be done as a matter of urgency. Investing in education is an option but majority of the time a prison education system is designed in combination with corporations of businesses and employers. There is a necessity for a change of the perception that employers have of the value of education inside prison and in the process to reduce the probability that an individual will re-offend. Even those who serve longer sentences and are acknowledged for their good behavior while inside, are damaged by the perception of prison education.
There can be no doubt that this is not an easy debate to have, especially with a media that intents on publicizing a myth of the “typical” criminal. In this age of desperation, we need to take the opportunity before us to converse openly about the future of crime and punishment in the USA and the UK.
How can we anticipate an individual with no prior work experience and no formal credentials outside of the prison settings to turn up for work on time everyday and conduct him/her self properly?
Could the answer be a lessening in short term sentences and an increase in rehabilitation programs where each case is looked at individually?
Hi Popy! I hope all is well with you in Oxford. Thanks for a great, thought-provoking post. This has been something I've thought about for a long time. Prison systems can be so twisted and evidently, so ineffective. I wish I had a clear answer, but I don't. I think the reason that neither of you at the conference could come to an agreement is because the problem is so multi-faceted and addressing just one of the institutions is not enough. I think that there needs to be a whole reevaluation of the understanding of crimes and why people commit them. As i always say, we need to address the root of the problem, not the symptoms. The first step I would take would probably be to educate the policy makers and the public on the reasons why people commit crimes.
Hello everyone, I have had the privilege of witnessing the inner workings of the NYC juvenile justice system through my internship with Esperanza. Education, in my opinion, is essential and the foundation of all else. As many of us probably know, a way in which the U.S. violates human rights is through the inadequate education programs provided in juvenile detention centers (and even more so in adult detention centers, where it may even be non-existent). In the same vein, educating policy-makers and actors in the juvenile justice system on the ongoing research in the field is of paramount importance. Without knowledge of the research that demonstrates the efficiency (or inefficiency) of incarceration versus restorative justice; how could we expect them to reform the system? To answer your questions, Popy, I would first invest in educating these individuals and move forward from there. In addition, I expressed to my mentor the need for comparative research with an emphasis on juvenile justice systems around the world. This would allow us to perhaps see what works and what does not.
I wish you continued success, Popy! Thanks again for the post.
Thanks for your post, Popy!
I would like to highlight a key word in your question: Start.
A start in any of the aforementioned areas will suffice. However, in whatever avenue I choose to start, say education, I will ensure that I do not duplicate existing initiatives. To achieve this, I will invest in studies that evaluate previous starts in my chosen area of intervention. Having identified common challenges in prior starts, I will develop a program that attempts to overcome the identified obstacles. Our starts will not immediately produce the desired end of a fairer justice system, but they certainly are important steps on the journey towards one.
There seems to be a consensus among Verons that policy makers need to be educated about the root causes of criminal behavior. I agree. As an aspiring policy maker, I am interested in the ways that we can achieve this objective of reeducation. Even more, if we achieve this reorientation of policymakers, how will it be translated into changes in laws, policies and organizational practices?
Have my best wishes in all your endeavors.
-J.W.
Question for Leena and James or for anyone else, but prompted by their posts: Can you be more specific about what you consider "the root causes" of the problem that are not limited to the US but seem to be of global proportions (Popy's "discovery" that these same inequities appear across geo-political borders)? What are some specific features of the current moment that create the conditions you witness on the ground in social institutions (e.g., criminal justice system) across nation-states?
Question for Ana or for anyone else, but prompted by her post: Do you think policy makers and actors in the system do not know the things you believe they should be taught? Put another way, what do you think they actually "know" and don't know that they need to be taught? Is it possible the information is out there? If so, is it possible they choose to ignore it? If that is the case, what would be your hypothesis about why they would choose to ignore the knowledge, information, data that is readily available?
Love you, Popy!
Years ago there was a very famous article critiquing the penal rehabilitation models of the 1970s. It was called “Nothing Works” and caused quite a stir because, after the numbers were crunched, the authors concluded that none of the existing reform models had lowered recidivism rates in any meaningful way. I have always chosen to think about that title in a different way: “Nothing” works, as in, if you do nothing, most people will grow up and stop committing crimes. This is quite personal for me. As some of you know, I had quite a wrong fork childhood and adolescence. Many of my friends of color ended up in Spofford, a famed juvenile detention center in the Bronx.
I, although designated a PIN (person in need of supervision) by the courts, ended up not being sent away. I am sure now that was because I was White. After 10 more years on the dark side, I straightened out. Had I followed in my father’s footsteps and gone to prison, I probably never would have gotten a GED, a BA, or a Ph.D. Because “nothing” was done to me (or for me), I moved on. The vast majority of teens in trouble do the same. Those who are arrested and incarcerated end up staying in the system though, as it perpetuates the very behavior it decries.
As we have been saying, while criminal activity (especially drug use) is pretty well distributed across race and class, all too often, those who are privileged by skin color or economic status may never have to become system involved. In answer to your query, Popy, I might just tear down the prison walls and distribute the 100, 000 quid for people to do with what they please. Money well spent.
Thank you Popy for the great post! It seems you are doing very well in the UK and it is very inspiring to hear about your experiences there.
I would like to answer Professor Waterston’s question that was prompted by Ana’s post. This has been something that I have contemplated quite often and feel fairly strong about. I feel as academics we often fall into a trap where we believe that we must educate policy makers on what is really going on. We end up believing that we know better than others, or that we have some kind of access to an unknown truth that we must share with the rest of the world, a type of academic savior complex. The problem with this is it couldn’t be any farther from the truth.
The great majority of policy makers have been well educated, and they also have just as much, if not more, access to academic publications relating to the issues they deal with than everybody else. The reason why it seems that policy makers are never making the “right” decisions that we academics have been telling them to do for years, is because policy makers are largely motivated by self interest. Policy makers need to respond to the most pressing problems that are visible to their constituents so that they can secure a longer stay in their position of power. This means most policy makers aren’t interested in long-term solutions to society’s greatest problems, but are instead constantly looking to prove to their constituents that they are doing something now that will make an immediate impact. A perfect example of this can be stop and frisk.
When stop and frisk was first implemented, it was at a time when crime was a serious problem (not to say that there is ever really a time when crime isn’t a problem). Today, supporters of the policy claim it to be an effective tool to decrease crime. There was probably even a time when the majority of New Yorkers supported stop and frisk because they were being fed statistics claiming it was the reason crime was on the decline. Politicians then looking to get ahead of their competition subsequently jumped on the stop and frisk bandwagon to gather support. The cold hard truth is this; politics is a game of manipulation. Although this concept won’t be new to most, politics is all about getting the people on your side to either maintain your position, or dethrone an incumbent. This is why stop and frisk was first implemented; to increase public support by showing the public that there is immediate actions being taken to decrease crime.
Tomorrow is Election Day, and now we can see the flip-side of this stop and frisk argument in candidate de Blasio. De Blasio has been a strong advocate against stop and frisk, but do not think for a second that it is a coincidence that the public just so happens to also be strongly against the policy. Just as there was a time when politicians used stop and frisk to gather public support, today, candidates like de Blasio do the same thing by advocating against it. I would go as far to say that if the public loved the stop and frisk policy, de Blasio and many of the other previous mayoral candidates would probably have proposed improving, or expanding the policy in some way.
We can go ahead and sit on our academic pedestals and truly believe we know more and want to teach policy makers all we want, but in the end, most policy makers know everything we know and then some. Being outsiders to the game of politics we can easily make arguments for the “obvious” solutions to the problems policy makers are constantly trying to fix, but these policy makers also know about these potential solutions. The problem isn’t convincing the policy makers that certain solutions are good ideas, its convincing the general public that it is what needs to be done, and getting to a place, as a community, where we can accept these long term (often slower, but steadier) solutions to society’s problems so that policy makers are not hesitant to implement these initiatives because sometimes the right moves we academics know must be taken, are not necessarily the most politically feasible, and therefore unthinkable for policy makers careers.
Hey Poppy,
Its nice to hear about how well a fellow Vera alumni is doing in the life after the fellowship.
In regards to the conference question of what we would change if given that large some of money, I would take the philanthropic approach of William Drayton. Drayton was one of the social action thinkers we read in class who coined the term "social entrepreneurship." What he did was give portions of his wealth to forward thinking social activist who had great ideas but little funds to start them with. So instead of working together with a bunch of social activist with their own agendas of change, I'd give that money to a novel idea that I believe in that would only require my financial backing.
Thanks so much for the post Popy, and welcome back to the Vera blog!
It's very ironic that you bring up prison reform because I just read an article abstract (from the official Vera website, actually) which compared the US prison system with certain European systems. The abstract noted that the studied European systems generally try to shape the prison system in a way to replicate "normal" society because they have found, by no surprise, that inmates that get accustom to prison have a hard time reintegrating back into society and are very likely to have high recidivism rates. In other words, they are striving to reverse the adverse affects of becoming "institutionalized."
I would offer to address the UK's teen prison problem on this same premise. For many of these teens, prison is the very first structure, other than the criminal world, they are introduced to and they become accustomed to it. For others, this system influences their still developing minds in a negative way, creating a ripple affect which will follow them for the rest of their lives. In both instances, it would be far more productive to structure the prison system in a way which replicates "normal" society, so once these teens are released, they have a foundation for how to survive.
Hello Popy,
Thanks for the amazing post. I have heard so much about you and glad to meet you over the blogosphere!!!!! I may not have the right answer to the question on recidivism but I would choose to work on education. I am currently interning at CASES for my Vera internship and I seeing the benefits of education. The students that I work with thorough the “Next Steps” program are pursuing college degrees. They are those who once committed crimes and are now going past the secondary level of education. Many of the students express that there a certain stigmas, which people associate with them and are trying to change. Education provides the opportunity to excel pass a certain obstacle. I believe the students are using education to break through certain hurdles, which many did not think was possible. I feel like placing a little more time on education will benefit the country in the end. Education is still in the developmental stages because one type of teaching/learning dynamic is the standard. The single dynamic does not account for individuals, who are not able to adapt or grasp the material. Those individuals that are below the line of passing commit crimes because of the lack of skills. Some educators do not take the time to help mold the child that does need the extra attention. If the educators stop caring the children are the individuals that suffer. I propose that we start to construct a way to change a system that has many flaws.
Thank you Popy. What an intriguing post!
That is a very challenging question to answer. With so many issues that need to be addressed, where do we start? I was stomped for a while but if I had to choose just one starting point I would choose to give the money to non-profit organizations. The challenge with genuine non-profits is that they have great ideas to effect change but must depend on agencies, individuals and even government to provide funding for them so they can address the issues. However, many times they may have "to jump through hoops" to get the sponsorship that they so desperately need. They are at the whim and political agendas of the donors (some are obvious and others are disguised) and somewhere along the way, the clients are forgotten about to some degree. I would give the non-profits the money. They can start education programs and other programs as they see fit for the community. However, they must either have a proven track record for really caring for and meeting the needs to the clients or they have a very clear and defined proposal as to how they will achieve their goals. After all, newcomers have great ideas too and just need a start. Look at Herb Sturz!
I would just carefully screen the non-profit to try as best as possible to determine that the clients are priority and there is no hidden agenda for personal or political gain.
Best of luck to you Popy!
Imtashal, I think the education system in prisons has improved over the years, at least in the US. (I don’t know much about the UK and am still learning.) No doubt, it’s not the best quality, but I think if we take a moment to analyze how the system has changed or evolved for the past 3 decades, we’d be content (not entirely, but still content to a degree) on the resources available to inmates today (think Herb Sturz, Vera, NYC today). I think it’s unfair to place the blame on employees for the quality of education available. We have to be mindful of other factors that influence the education in prisons (to name a few: funding, bureaucracy, public policy, administrations in command, the number of inmates vs. how many spaces are available for resources, etc…).
Leena, it’s okay to not have a clear answer! I don’t think anyone has a definite answer (hence a roomful of people not being able to come to an agreement at the Howard League Conference). Indeed, the problem is multifaceted and therefore, we cannot identify the “root causes of crime.” We can only make assumptions and associations. I think it’s so dangerous when researchers (in general) conclude the causes crime because policy makers often pay attention to these studies and use them as a foreground to change or implement policy. As a result, you get over-policing, racial-profiling, among other things that will make you sick to your stomach. If you want to read more on what are some assumptions that explain crime, refer to Farrington’s work.
Ana, as I mentioned to Imtashal, the quality of education can be improved. However, I don’t think it’s necessarily a violation of human rights. I think that’s a bit extreme… I think your opinion on the quality of education would shift if you read Governor Cuomo’s “Close to Home” Initiative, specifically, ways to improve education. It’s not perfect, but it’s better than what was offered before. I can at least admit that I was relieved by how much attention is given to education in the legislation… When you say “educating these people,” what if they don’t want to learn? What if they don’t want an education, is that okay? We cannot assume that everyone in prison right now is eager and enthusiastic to learn and get a college degree or move forward. I don’t know how many times I wanted to give up on life and become a couch potato. I know I sound cynical, but I have to play devil’s advocate to keep you thinking about the complexities surrounding this issue. As for comparative research, that’s a bright idea, but bear in mind that what works in Brazil won’t work in the US or China. The wants and needs of people are different and crimes are ever-changing… What works today won’t work decades from now.
James, please refer to my comment to Leena on root causes of crime. I think assessing what has already been done is a very wise idea and resourceful and efficient in so many ways. In terms of intervention, could you say more about that?
Professor Waterston, thank you for your enthusiasm! I adore it!
Professor Stein, I have to admit, I like your idea the best! Thank you so much for sharing such a powerful and touching story! Lots of love for you! Whether we are in the 1970s or the 2000s, recidivism rates have not decreased--the US still topping any country on rates of incarceration and the UK not falling too far behind.
Michael, agreed. Ideas of crime are ever-changing, though. Refer to my comment to Ana.
Spencer, are you saying what is spent so far is not enough? Is there a single solution to this issue?
Anthony, good idea--refer to my comment to Ana. It’s helpful to compare the issues in the US to Europe or anywhere else for that matter, but policy transition does not always work, although I am aware that this is contrary to popular belief.
Jaread, hello, nice to meet you, too! I’m quite jealous and envious of you! I interned at CASES and absolutely loved it there. My advice to you is be open-minded and curious and it’ll be a wonderful experience. Refer to my comments on education to Imtashal and Ana… Stigma is another issue that I’m not sure how to address. It’s another question to think of.
Simonne, agreed. Money is always an issue. Funding helps and I appreciate your ideas on accountability, but bear in mind that sometimes it’s not all that simple for agencies to meet clients’ wants and needs. In fact many agencies lose funding for that sole reason…
Thank you all for your very thoughtful posts. I enjoyed reading each and every one. Please feel free to reply to my comments and I will check back tomorrow to reply once more.
Cheers,
Popy
Hi Popy! First off, I would like to apologize for not replying to your blog earlier as I've been overwhelmed with a conference that I was invited to fly out to by my internship (Center of Victimization and Safety) and have been trying to learn the ropes!
I've read all of your comments fellow Verons, and have to say that you all make a profound point. There are several ways at which we can try to reform the system, but without adequate and comprehensive education to the public, these reforms will not last.
Last night, I was speaking with a representative from 'The Guys Project' which focuses on educating male adults in issues concerning violence against women, and we got into a conversation about how his passion lies with educating the youth about these issues. Although educating adults should be a focus, I believe that focusing on our youth will make a much more profound effect on our systems in place. Our youth are going to be running this country someday so if they are raised in an environment where, for example, they realize the implications of violence against women and how our culture and the systems in place propagate violence, they will be able to understand it and correct it before it becomes habit.
All in all, I would use any sort of funding in educating our youth to the issues at hand. They are our future and without educating them, all of our systems will remain in place.
Best of luck, Popy!
Popy, you rock. Thanks so much for getting this started and for writing back individually -- all the way from lovely (o.k., rainy) Oxford!!
I don't have any real answers, but I do remember talking with Thomas Giovanni (who the current Verons will meet on Thursday at the court house) about all the many problems (racism, poverty, plea agreements, case loads, stop and frisk, etc.) that result in the crazy number of young men of color in court. And I asked him if we simply changed one thing -- for example, the ridiculously large case load that defense attorneys have (that make them less effective counsel as well as more likely to recommend pleas) -- would it make a difference, would more justice be served (leaving untouched root causes: racism, poverty, etc.) and he said yes. I'm not sure that is how he would spend his quid -- let's remember to ask him! -- but it did make me think that we have to both address root causes and think about creating more just outcomes today.
This popaganza has been popylicious!
Thank you!
Apollonia, I agree. It's important to educate the leaders of tomorrow.
Professor Reitz, I would love to hear Thomas Giovanni's thoughts on this...
Professor Stein, thanks again for allowing me to blog!
Post a Comment